I thought that if Mueller found anything during his investigation into Trump/Russian Collusion that he would have had to make it up because we here have seen the evidence showing nothing of that sort happened. Yet now that Mueller has stated that no Trump nor anyone on his campaign helped Russia interfere with the election. Not that Russia even did.

So now that it's been released what does Bernie have to say about Vlad having control over Trump?
This:

It is clear that Donald Trump wanted nothing more than to shut down the Mueller investigation. While we have more detail from today's report than before, Congress must continue its investigation into Trump's conduct and any foreign attempts to influence our election.

I don't understand why Bernie has signed on to this bullsh*t unless he's playing along with the democrats scam on us and giving Hillary cover for losing the election. Let's remember everything that has happened to us since this started. Google, Facebook and Twitter have changed their algorithms to keep people from going to alternative websites that tell us the truth about the crap that is happening. Those same companies have started censoring people who say things that the PTB don't want us to know about. We have new websites guardians such as NewsGuard and the Integrity Initiative and Hamilton 68 just to name a few.

Here's Glenn showing that Mueller has totally debunked any connection between people on Trumps campaign and Russia.

The two-pronged conspiracy theory that has dominated U.S. political discourse for almost three years – that (1) Trump, his family and his campaign conspired or coordinated with Russia to interfere in the 2016 election, and (2) Trump is beholden to Russian President Vladimir Putin — was not merely rejected today by the final report of Special Counsel Robert Mueller. It was obliterated: in an undeniable and definitive manner.

The key fact is this: Mueller – contrary to weeks of false media claims – did not merely issue a narrow, cramped, legalistic finding that there was insufficient evidence to indict Trump associates for conspiring with Russia and then proving their guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. That would have been devastating enough to those who spent the last two years or more misleading people to believe that conspiracy convictions of Trump’s closest aides and family members were inevitable. But his mandate was much broader than that: to state what did or did not happen.

That’s precisely what he did: Mueller, in addition to concluding that evidence was insufficient to charge any American with crimes relating to Russian election interference, also stated emphatically in numerous instances that there was no evidence – not merely that there was insufficient evidence to obtain a criminal conviction – that key prongs of this three-year-old conspiracy theory actually happened. As Mueller himself put it: “in some instances, the report points out the absence of evidence or conflicts in the evidence about a particular fact or event.”

With regard to Facebook ads and Twitter posts from the Russia-based Internet Research Agency, for example, Mueller could not have been more blunt: “The investigation did not identify evidence that any U.S. persons knowingly or intentionally coordinated with the IRA’s interference operation” (emphasis added). Note that this exoneration includes not only Trump campaign officials but all Americans:

This is worth reading to see how he shows in detail what Mueller's report does.

Let's recap: Bernie didn't do much after the primary was rigged. He says that Hillary won it fair and square. He's signed on to Russia Gate. He says that Madura is not the duly elected president of Venezuela. He has still not said anything about the arrest of both Assange and Manning. Now this.
This tells me that Bernie will play along with lying to the American people for whatever reasons the democrats have decided to hitch their wagon to this false scandal.

Comments

Mueller is saying that it wasn't up to him to make a prosecutorial decision and is following Jaworski's example in Watergate. This is not for the AG to decide it is for Congress. pic.twitter.com/y0IA5ayC7c

and backfires on them good, in the form of an even more stunning electoral defeat?

Stand back and let them get it over with then—what choice do we have? They’re not going to let advice from the socialist Left peanut gallery stop ’em, any more than they listened to us in Philadelphia in 2016.

Even cheering or vowing to vote for Bernie just seems to encourage them and egg them on.

But even given all of the horrific decisions being made in the White House, there is one organization that is far crazier and possibly even more dangerous. That is the United States Congress, which is, not surprisingly, a legislative body that is viewed positively by only 18 per cent of the American people.

A current bill originally entitled the “Defending American Security from Kremlin Aggression Act (DASKA) of 2019,” is numbered S-1189. It has been introduced in the Senate which will “…require the Secretary of State to determine whether the Russian Federation should be designated as a state sponsor of terrorism and whether Russian-sponsored armed entities in Ukraine should be designated as foreign terrorist organizations.” The bill is sponsored by Republican Senator Cory Gardner of Colorado and is co-sponsored by Democrat Robert Menendez of New Jersey.

The current version of the bill was introduced on April 11th and it is by no means clear what kind of support it might actually have, but the fact that it actually has surfaced at all should be disturbing to anyone who believes it is in the world’s best interest to avoid direct military confrontation between the United States and Russia.

In a a press release by Gardner, who has long been pushing to have Russia listed as a state sponsor of terrorism, a February version of the bill is described as “…comprehensive legislation [that] seeks to increase economic, political, and diplomatic pressure on the Russian Federation in response to Russia’s interference in democratic processes abroad, malign influence in Syria, and aggression against Ukraine, including in the Kerch Strait. The legislation establishes a comprehensive policy response to better position the US government to address Kremlin aggression by creating new policy offices on cyber defenses and sanctions coordination. The bill stands up for NATO and prevents the President from pulling the US out of the Alliance without a Senate vote. It also increases sanctions pressure on Moscow for its interference in democratic processes abroad and continued aggression against Ukraine.”

The February version of the bill included Menendez, Democrat Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, Democrat Ben Cardin of Maryland and Republican Lindsey Graham of South Carolina as co-sponsors, suggesting that provoking war is truly bipartisan in today’s Washington.

Each Senator co-sponsor contributed a personal comment to the press release. Gardner observed that “Putin’s Russia is an outlaw regime that is hell-bent on undermining international law and destroying the US-led liberal global order.” Menendez noted that “President Trump’s willful paralysis in the face of Kremlin aggression has reached a boiling point in Congress” while Graham added that “Our goal is to change the status quo and impose meaningful sanctions and measures against Putin’s Russia. He should cease and desist meddling in the US electoral process, halt cyberattacks on American infrastructure, remove Russia from Ukraine, and stop efforts to create chaos in Syria.” Cardin contributed “Congress continues to take the lead in defending US national security against continuing Russian aggression against democratic institutions at home and abroad” and Shaheen observed that “This legislation builds on previous efforts in Congress to hold Russia accountable for its bellicose behavior against the United States and its determination to destabilize our global world order.”

Congress is f'cking nuts! They know that we won't survive a war with Russia because some idiot is going to use nukes. The mini nukes that we have developed might not cause as much damage as regular ones would, but do they realize that Russia doesn't have mini nukes and if we lob one of ours into Russia they will send full sized ones back? The article states that Russia's military is getting ready for war and could probably beat ours. Sure we have been at war for almost two decades, but we haven't been able to win any of them. One of the reasons we weren't wiped out in Iraq is because we paid the terrorists not to fight us. We paid term to fight for us in Libya and Syria so are we going to pay them to fight for us if we do fight Russia?

Good lord! This is just beyond insane and they have no right to risk the whole damned world just because Russia is interfering with our hegemonic destruction of one country after another.

Will any of the people who are running for president speak out against this madness? Tulsi might, but I'm not counting on any of the others to do so. Not Bernie for sure. He has to know what signing on to this Russian propaganda is going to bring us.

up

29 users have voted.

—

America is a pathetic nation; a fascist state fueled by the greed, malice, and stupidity of her own people.
- strife delivery

Among other things this is intended as complete and total cover for anything the US wants to do to any other state anywhere at any time. "Russia was going to do it, so we did it first". Stupid schoolyard crap.

hard and why Bernie's going along with it. This starts out with our history of warmongering since the Cold War ended and includes this tidbit that slipped through my radar.

But even given all of the horrific decisions being made in the White House, there is one organization that is far crazier and possibly even more dangerous. That is the United States Congress, which is, not surprisingly, a legislative body that is viewed positively by only 18 per cent of the American people.

A current bill originally entitled the “Defending American Security from Kremlin Aggression Act (DASKA) of 2019,” is numbered S-1189. It has been introduced in the Senate which will “…require the Secretary of State to determine whether the Russian Federation should be designated as a state sponsor of terrorism and whether Russian-sponsored armed entities in Ukraine should be designated as foreign terrorist organizations.” The bill is sponsored by Republican Senator Cory Gardner of Colorado and is co-sponsored by Democrat Robert Menendez of New Jersey.

The current version of the bill was introduced on April 11th and it is by no means clear what kind of support it might actually have, but the fact that it actually has surfaced at all should be disturbing to anyone who believes it is in the world’s best interest to avoid direct military confrontation between the United States and Russia.

In a a press release by Gardner, who has long been pushing to have Russia listed as a state sponsor of terrorism, a February version of the bill is described as “…comprehensive legislation [that] seeks to increase economic, political, and diplomatic pressure on the Russian Federation in response to Russia’s interference in democratic processes abroad, malign influence in Syria, and aggression against Ukraine, including in the Kerch Strait. The legislation establishes a comprehensive policy response to better position the US government to address Kremlin aggression by creating new policy offices on cyber defenses and sanctions coordination. The bill stands up for NATO and prevents the President from pulling the US out of the Alliance without a Senate vote. It also increases sanctions pressure on Moscow for its interference in democratic processes abroad and continued aggression against Ukraine.”

The February version of the bill included Menendez, Democrat Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, Democrat Ben Cardin of Maryland and Republican Lindsey Graham of South Carolina as co-sponsors, suggesting that provoking war is truly bipartisan in today’s Washington.

Each Senator co-sponsor contributed a personal comment to the press release. Gardner observed that “Putin’s Russia is an outlaw regime that is hell-bent on undermining international law and destroying the US-led liberal global order.” Menendez noted that “President Trump’s willful paralysis in the face of Kremlin aggression has reached a boiling point in Congress” while Graham added that “Our goal is to change the status quo and impose meaningful sanctions and measures against Putin’s Russia. He should cease and desist meddling in the US electoral process, halt cyberattacks on American infrastructure, remove Russia from Ukraine, and stop efforts to create chaos in Syria.” Cardin contributed “Congress continues to take the lead in defending US national security against continuing Russian aggression against democratic institutions at home and abroad” and Shaheen observed that “This legislation builds on previous efforts in Congress to hold Russia accountable for its bellicose behavior against the United States and its determination to destabilize our global world order.”

Congress is f'cking nuts! They know that we won't survive a war with Russia because some idiot is going to use nukes. The mini nukes that we have developed might not cause as much damage as regular ones would, but do they realize that Russia doesn't have mini nukes and if we lob one of ours into Russia they will send full sized ones back? The article states that Russia's military is getting ready for war and could probably beat ours. Sure we have been at war for almost two decades, but we haven't been able to win any of them. One of the reasons we weren't wiped out in Iraq is because we paid the terrorists not to fight us. We paid term to fight for us in Libya and Syria so are we going to pay them to fight for us if we do fight Russia?

Good lord! This is just beyond insane and they have no right to risk the whole damned world just because Russia is interfering with our hegemonic destruction of one country after another.

Will any of the people who are running for president speak out against this madness? Tulsi might, but I'm not counting on any of the others to do so. Not Bernie for sure. He has to know what signing on to this Russian propaganda is going to bring us.

And that's fucking scary and hard to say. But we are "led" by bloodthirsty maniacs, to echo Jimmy Dore, and there ain't much doubting that.

Wonder when the AUMF will be leveraged to attack Russia?

How can we counter such blatant asshattery:

“Putin’s Russia is an outlaw regime that is hell-bent on undermining international law and destroying the US-led liberal global order.”

“Congress continues to take the lead in defending US national security against continuing Russian aggression against democratic institutions at home and abroad”

“This legislation builds on previous efforts in Congress to hold Russia accountable for its bellicose behavior against the United States and its determination to destabilize our global world order.”

This reminds me of an argument I had with Booman23 way back in the day. He was claiming that anyone who wanted to stop the Occupation of Iraq was a terrorist sympathizer. The more I argued, the more he was proven right.

Peace harmony have been painted into a corner here, and it's been done FAR above our paygrade. War is coming and there seems to be NOTHING we can do about it. Scary shit.

But even given all of the horrific decisions being made in the White House, there is one organization that is far crazier and possibly even more dangerous. That is the United States Congress, which is, not surprisingly, a legislative body that is viewed positively by only 18 per cent of the American people.

A current bill originally entitled the “Defending American Security from Kremlin Aggression Act (DASKA) of 2019,” is numbered S-1189. It has been introduced in the Senate which will “…require the Secretary of State to determine whether the Russian Federation should be designated as a state sponsor of terrorism and whether Russian-sponsored armed entities in Ukraine should be designated as foreign terrorist organizations.” The bill is sponsored by Republican Senator Cory Gardner of Colorado and is co-sponsored by Democrat Robert Menendez of New Jersey.

The current version of the bill was introduced on April 11th and it is by no means clear what kind of support it might actually have, but the fact that it actually has surfaced at all should be disturbing to anyone who believes it is in the world’s best interest to avoid direct military confrontation between the United States and Russia.

In a a press release by Gardner, who has long been pushing to have Russia listed as a state sponsor of terrorism, a February version of the bill is described as “…comprehensive legislation [that] seeks to increase economic, political, and diplomatic pressure on the Russian Federation in response to Russia’s interference in democratic processes abroad, malign influence in Syria, and aggression against Ukraine, including in the Kerch Strait. The legislation establishes a comprehensive policy response to better position the US government to address Kremlin aggression by creating new policy offices on cyber defenses and sanctions coordination. The bill stands up for NATO and prevents the President from pulling the US out of the Alliance without a Senate vote. It also increases sanctions pressure on Moscow for its interference in democratic processes abroad and continued aggression against Ukraine.”

The February version of the bill included Menendez, Democrat Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, Democrat Ben Cardin of Maryland and Republican Lindsey Graham of South Carolina as co-sponsors, suggesting that provoking war is truly bipartisan in today’s Washington.

Each Senator co-sponsor contributed a personal comment to the press release. Gardner observed that “Putin’s Russia is an outlaw regime that is hell-bent on undermining international law and destroying the US-led liberal global order.” Menendez noted that “President Trump’s willful paralysis in the face of Kremlin aggression has reached a boiling point in Congress” while Graham added that “Our goal is to change the status quo and impose meaningful sanctions and measures against Putin’s Russia. He should cease and desist meddling in the US electoral process, halt cyberattacks on American infrastructure, remove Russia from Ukraine, and stop efforts to create chaos in Syria.” Cardin contributed “Congress continues to take the lead in defending US national security against continuing Russian aggression against democratic institutions at home and abroad” and Shaheen observed that “This legislation builds on previous efforts in Congress to hold Russia accountable for its bellicose behavior against the United States and its determination to destabilize our global world order.”

Congress is f'cking nuts! They know that we won't survive a war with Russia because some idiot is going to use nukes. The mini nukes that we have developed might not cause as much damage as regular ones would, but do they realize that Russia doesn't have mini nukes and if we lob one of ours into Russia they will send full sized ones back? The article states that Russia's military is getting ready for war and could probably beat ours. Sure we have been at war for almost two decades, but we haven't been able to win any of them. One of the reasons we weren't wiped out in Iraq is because we paid the terrorists not to fight us. We paid term to fight for us in Libya and Syria so are we going to pay them to fight for us if we do fight Russia?

Good lord! This is just beyond insane and they have no right to risk the whole damned world just because Russia is interfering with our hegemonic destruction of one country after another.

Will any of the people who are running for president speak out against this madness? Tulsi might, but I'm not counting on any of the others to do so. Not Bernie for sure. He has to know what signing on to this Russian propaganda is going to bring us.

A STATEMENT ON THE 44TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE CAMBODIAN GENOCIDE AND THE LEGACY OF HENRY KISSINGER
44 years ago, yesterday, Cambodia was taken over by the Khmer Rouge. From 1975 to 1979, in what is referred to as the Cambodian Genocide, a quarter of the country’s entire population was wiped out. There is some debate over the exact number: 1.6 million dead? 2.5 million?

In the 2000s, Cambodia held a national tribunal. Two prominent party members were convicted for crimes against humanity. But someone else should have been tried, too. And we, as a nation, cannot talk about the genocide without talking about the United States.

“It’s an order, to be done. Anything that flies, on anything that moves.”

The fall of Phnom Penh may have been executed by Pol Pot, but it was designed by Henry Kissinger. In 1969, off of CIA intelligence, President Richard Nixon gave Kissinger - then the US National Security Advisor - a carte blanche to target Vietnamese troops in Cambodia. Up to 500,000 people died in our air raids.

The Khmer Rouge took advantage of the destabilization and used our crimes as propaganda to recruit civilians. In the 80s, after their defeat, we would go on to fund their exiled soldiers.

“It’s an order, to be done. Anything that flies, on anything that moves.”

Henry Kissinger, a man whose appetite for corpses is dwarfed only by his gluttony for division. In a just world, he would be tried as an accomplice in the Cambodian Genocide. But it isn’t just Cambodia. You will find him trailing blood in Chile, in Vietnam, in Bangladesh, in Argentina, in Laos, in Indonesia, in Israel, in Cyprus, in Cuba, in East Timor (a third of the population killed). In 2018, on North Korea, he demurred: “The temptation [of] ... a pre-emptive strike is strong.”

“It’s an order, to be done. Anything that flies, on anything that moves.”

When we talk about Kissinger, we must confront the fact that - while looming large - he is merely one cog in the American war machine. We must beware the other Kissingers. The ones whose names and faces are yet to stain our history books. The men and women waiting patiently for their turn to whisper “Death.” in the ears of our leaders. Some of them are already there. And we, the people, have a duty to shout back “Peace.”

We may never see Henry Kissinger extradited to The Hague. So let us rebel by doing what he despises most. To band together. To unite, under one wish - his speedy extradition to Hell.

Donate - Twitter - Instagram
Paid for by the Committee for Peace, Justice, and Mike Gravel, a grassroots campaign committed to getting Senator Mike Gravel to the Democratic Debates.

Contributions to the Committee for Peace, Justice, and Mike Gravel are not tax-deductible.

hard and why Bernie's going along with it. This starts out with our history of warmongering since the Cold War ended and includes this tidbit that slipped through my radar.

But even given all of the horrific decisions being made in the White House, there is one organization that is far crazier and possibly even more dangerous. That is the United States Congress, which is, not surprisingly, a legislative body that is viewed positively by only 18 per cent of the American people.

A current bill originally entitled the “Defending American Security from Kremlin Aggression Act (DASKA) of 2019,” is numbered S-1189. It has been introduced in the Senate which will “…require the Secretary of State to determine whether the Russian Federation should be designated as a state sponsor of terrorism and whether Russian-sponsored armed entities in Ukraine should be designated as foreign terrorist organizations.” The bill is sponsored by Republican Senator Cory Gardner of Colorado and is co-sponsored by Democrat Robert Menendez of New Jersey.

The current version of the bill was introduced on April 11th and it is by no means clear what kind of support it might actually have, but the fact that it actually has surfaced at all should be disturbing to anyone who believes it is in the world’s best interest to avoid direct military confrontation between the United States and Russia.

In a a press release by Gardner, who has long been pushing to have Russia listed as a state sponsor of terrorism, a February version of the bill is described as “…comprehensive legislation [that] seeks to increase economic, political, and diplomatic pressure on the Russian Federation in response to Russia’s interference in democratic processes abroad, malign influence in Syria, and aggression against Ukraine, including in the Kerch Strait. The legislation establishes a comprehensive policy response to better position the US government to address Kremlin aggression by creating new policy offices on cyber defenses and sanctions coordination. The bill stands up for NATO and prevents the President from pulling the US out of the Alliance without a Senate vote. It also increases sanctions pressure on Moscow for its interference in democratic processes abroad and continued aggression against Ukraine.”

The February version of the bill included Menendez, Democrat Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, Democrat Ben Cardin of Maryland and Republican Lindsey Graham of South Carolina as co-sponsors, suggesting that provoking war is truly bipartisan in today’s Washington.

Each Senator co-sponsor contributed a personal comment to the press release. Gardner observed that “Putin’s Russia is an outlaw regime that is hell-bent on undermining international law and destroying the US-led liberal global order.” Menendez noted that “President Trump’s willful paralysis in the face of Kremlin aggression has reached a boiling point in Congress” while Graham added that “Our goal is to change the status quo and impose meaningful sanctions and measures against Putin’s Russia. He should cease and desist meddling in the US electoral process, halt cyberattacks on American infrastructure, remove Russia from Ukraine, and stop efforts to create chaos in Syria.” Cardin contributed “Congress continues to take the lead in defending US national security against continuing Russian aggression against democratic institutions at home and abroad” and Shaheen observed that “This legislation builds on previous efforts in Congress to hold Russia accountable for its bellicose behavior against the United States and its determination to destabilize our global world order.”

Congress is f'cking nuts! They know that we won't survive a war with Russia because some idiot is going to use nukes. The mini nukes that we have developed might not cause as much damage as regular ones would, but do they realize that Russia doesn't have mini nukes and if we lob one of ours into Russia they will send full sized ones back? The article states that Russia's military is getting ready for war and could probably beat ours. Sure we have been at war for almost two decades, but we haven't been able to win any of them. One of the reasons we weren't wiped out in Iraq is because we paid the terrorists not to fight us. We paid term to fight for us in Libya and Syria so are we going to pay them to fight for us if we do fight Russia?

Good lord! This is just beyond insane and they have no right to risk the whole damned world just because Russia is interfering with our hegemonic destruction of one country after another.

Will any of the people who are running for president speak out against this madness? Tulsi might, but I'm not counting on any of the others to do so. Not Bernie for sure. He has to know what signing on to this Russian propaganda is going to bring us.

Saint Bernie the Popular, yet another millionaire who brings his own town hall TV crowd to outfox the masses. Don't think or talk about the lack of votes in congress for all the HOPE DOPE, not while he's running for precedent, again. go bernie go One more book, D-Formula for $uccess. unified plutocracy

stoopid amerika
thanks obama
good luck

Thanks snoopydawg, I'm too cynical from experience. 2020 has the same D stench as 2016. Maybe all is well in your real life neighborhood, not the virtual 'hood. My neighbors are looking at Idaho and Utah lately, to get the hell out of California. Anywhere but California. wah
PEACE

Saint Bernie the Popular, yet another millionaire who brings his own town hall TV crowd to outfox the masses.

I've read almost the exact same thing over on TOP.

go bernie go
two skis one big shark
eternal duopoly

Saint Bernie the Popular, yet another millionaire who brings his own town hall TV crowd to outfox the masses. Don't think or talk about the lack of votes in congress for all the HOPE DOPE, not while he's running for precedent, again. go bernie go One more book, D-Formula for $uccess. unified plutocracy

stoopid amerika
thanks obama
good luck

Thanks snoopydawg, I'm too cynical from experience. 2020 has the same D stench as 2016. Maybe all is well in your real life neighborhood, not the virtual 'hood. My neighbors are looking at Idaho and Utah lately, to get the hell out of California. Anywhere but California. wah
PEACE

I read some of the report itself and read articles pro and con. I think it is written so you see what you want to see. Just as Comey protected Hillary, Mueller will protect Trump. It is their job. If they don’t protect them, who else will blow up the globe?

I am so disappointed in Bernie. Tulsi has a snowball’s chance in hell. Pelosi, Schumer, Tandeen, McAuliffe, & Buttigeig are holding secret meetings plotting to steal another primary. Superdelegate Sen Stabenow announced publicly, so you know she has permission, that she would knee cap Sanders if it come to a second vote. It’s them, not us.

@dkmich
in which he does an analysis of the key points of the Mueller report. He expresses the same kind of frustration that many of us on the left have had for the continued insistence that somehow Trump and/or his campaign conspired to rig the 2016 election.

My own frustration has been why there has not been an investigation into the use of the fake Steele dossier to rig the FISA Court and the FBI's and DoJ's abuse of the FISA system.

I read some of the report itself and read articles pro and con. I think it is written so you see what you want to see. Just as Comey protected Hillary, Mueller will protect Trump. It is their job. If they don’t protect them, who else will blow up the globe?

I am so disappointed in Bernie. Tulsi has a snowball’s chance in hell. Pelosi, Schumer, Tandeen, McAuliffe, & Buttigeig are holding secret meetings plotting to steal another primary. Superdelegate Sen Stabenow announced publicly, so you know she has permission, that she would knee cap Sanders if it come to a second vote. It’s them, not us.

up

12 users have voted.

—

"I don't want to run the empire, I want to bring it down!" ~Dr. Cornel West

"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." John F Kennedy

Since they were all wrong about Russia rigging our elections unless you include the 12 trolls, they've moved on to other crimes. Is Trump guilty of crimes? Hell yes, all the Democrats and msm Mueller blah, blah, blah. They saw it in his report. So now Tlaib has a resolution to impeach Trump that AOC of course jumped right on to support.

I will take a look at what Tracey wrote. Thanks for letting me know.

#6 in which he does an analysis of the key points of the Mueller report. He expresses the same kind of frustration that many of us on the left have had for the continued insistence that somehow Trump and/or his campaign conspired to rig the 2016 election.

My own frustration has been why there has not been an investigation into the use of the fake Steele dossier to rig the FISA Court and the FBI's and DoJ's abuse of the FISA system.

1. To protect Obama’s lying, cheating, corrupt ass.
2. To cover for the ultimate disgrace of the Clinton Creature losing to Trump.
3. To cover for the almost unthinkable prospect of all our intelligence agencies being weaponized against a presidential candidate, who then went on to win the election, is a disgrace and criminal act that will live on in history no matter how much Dims try pretend they didn’t try to pull a soft coup and upend the will of the American people. They’d end up having to investigate the biggest names in the ‘Dimocritic’ Party.
4. Any so-called ‘leftist’ who gets on the Collusion Express and starts echoing the lies and propaganda of the last 3 damn years is our ENEMY, not someone we can work with, They absolutely cannot be trusted. They have no regard for the truth, the will of the American people, or the laws of this country.

What’s funniest about this is the hypocrisy of Senator Better Way. He’s lying. We know he’s lying. He knows we know, but what the Hell, he’s going to run with it anyway.

Why has no investigation been opened into the Clinton Dossier? Because the whole corrupt party can’t afford it. They’re all in in it now. And THIS is where REAL collusion took place, between the Dims and British intelligence and Russian oligarchs and criminals,

EDIT: cover/cover

#6 in which he does an analysis of the key points of the Mueller report. He expresses the same kind of frustration that many of us on the left have had for the continued insistence that somehow Trump and/or his campaign conspired to rig the 2016 election.

My own frustration has been why there has not been an investigation into the use of the fake Steele dossier to rig the FISA Court and the FBI's and DoJ's abuse of the FISA system.

I conspired with Putinchen. He is sleeping under my bed and if he shows restless signs of some terrorist desires, I show him something that mellows him down. It works. Do not fear to be nuked. I defused/confused that thingy. Houston, we have no problem, nothing new on the Eastern Front/under my bed.
Get some sleep, people, it works wonders.

To amend title III of the Social Security Act to extend reemployment services and eligibility assessments to all claimants for unemployment benefits, and for other purposes.

Providing for budget enforcement for fiscal year 2020.

wut da fuk is "budget enforcement"? I'm afraid to look, I mean it could be a good thing but I can't take anymore ungood things right now so prefer to look away. I wish I were in Dixie. cheers
.
.
.
Go back to sleep, go back to sleep, go back to ZZZzzzzzz. sweet dreams

Is there something in the air in Utah ???

I conspired with Putinchen. He is sleeping under my bed and if he shows restless signs of some terrorist desires, I show him something that mellows him down. It works. Do not fear to be nuked. I defused/confused that thingy. Houston, we have no problem, nothing new on the Eastern Front/under my bed.
Get some sleep, people, it works wonders.

@mimi
How is it related to the information in the essay? Or is there another reason for this comment?

Is there something in the air in Utah ???

I conspired with Putinchen. He is sleeping under my bed and if he shows restless signs of some terrorist desires, I show him something that mellows him down. It works. Do not fear to be nuked. I defused/confused that thingy. Houston, we have no problem, nothing new on the Eastern Front/under my bed.
Get some sleep, people, it works wonders.

up

5 users have voted.

—

"I don't want to run the empire, I want to bring it down!" ~Dr. Cornel West

"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." John F Kennedy

this essay because it's also about bernie, as was arendt's when you'd seemed quite vexed as to his characterizations of bernie supporters/clans, etc.

thanks for letting me/us know though. while i certainly didn't agree with him (i guess your sure he's a he) on many issues, i did like being subjected to the different points of view (even if inconsistent) he'd brought.

yes, i do understand that you act in what you consider the best interests of the site. can't think of anything to add, really, save: g' night; peace be with you...and with us all.

#7.2.1.1
because he's banned. And to anticipate your asking I'll just say this; What I do I consider best for this site and I'll just leave it at that.

this essay because it's also about bernie, as was arendt's when you'd seemed quite vexed as to his characterizations of bernie supporters/clans, etc.

thanks for letting me/us know though. while i certainly didn't agree with him (i guess your sure he's a he) on many issues, i did like being subjected to the different points of view (even if inconsistent) he'd brought.

yes, i do understand that you act in what you consider the best interests of the site. can't think of anything to add, really, save: g' night; peace be with you...and with us all.

how Bernie's continued support of Russiagate is beneficial from a campaign strategy standpoint. According to a 2018 Gallup poll, Russiagate is not one of the top priorities for American voters. So why does Bernie continue to speak out on the topic of Russiagate when it is not a top voter issue and there has been no proof that Russia affected the outcome of the 2016? My only guess is that Bernie is doing this because he believes it will ingratiate him with the powers that be who run the Democratic party. Otherwise, it makes no sense to me.

up

17 users have voted.

—

"I don't want to run the empire, I want to bring it down!" ~Dr. Cornel West

"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." John F Kennedy

@gulfgal98
most of the leftwing of the Democratic Party did in 1949. He's afraid of being branded a "Russian stooge" so he'll join up for the New Cold War rather than risk being Blacklisted. We have all been here before. Right, Senator Sanders? As far Right as is necessary.

how Bernie's continued support of Russiagate is beneficial from a campaign strategy standpoint. According to a 2018 Gallup poll, Russiagate is not one of the top priorities for American voters. So why does Bernie continue to speak out on the topic of Russiagate when it is not a top voter issue and there has been no proof that Russia affected the outcome of the 2016? My only guess is that Bernie is doing this because he believes it will ingratiate him with the powers that be who run the Democratic party. Otherwise, it makes no sense to me.

#8 most of the leftwing of the Democratic Party did in 1949. He's afraid of being branded a "Russian stooge" so he'll join up for the New Cold War rather than risk being Blacklisted. We have all been here before. Right, Senator Sanders? As far Right as is necessary.

@gjohnsit@gjohnsit
I'm sure we've all seen it. (See the Wapo tweet in the OP!) Pushing the lie to save himself is a terrible reason anyway but, if that's why he's pushing it, he didn't even get much cover for it.

@gulfgal98
I was initially perplexed on how some visible progressive voices did not see through the russiagate BS. Michael Moore at one point called Trump a Russian traitor. I think they saw how ruinous it would be for their brand/voice if they adopted skepticism or were just neutral on it. When clips of Jimmy Dore/TYT Aggressive Progressive clips were posted to youtube, the haters really came out.

My conclusion is that the much ofthe base of the democratic party was fully invested in Russiagate, and it is that audience that sustains many public progressive voices. Michael Moore would never appear again on Bill Mahrer's show if he became a Russiagate skeptic.

how Bernie's continued support of Russiagate is beneficial from a campaign strategy standpoint. According to a 2018 Gallup poll, Russiagate is not one of the top priorities for American voters. So why does Bernie continue to speak out on the topic of Russiagate when it is not a top voter issue and there has been no proof that Russia affected the outcome of the 2016? My only guess is that Bernie is doing this because he believes it will ingratiate him with the powers that be who run the Democratic party. Otherwise, it makes no sense to me.

@MrWebster
support Obama, still. He had an 80% approval rating his entire 8 years from democrats. That is Wall street war criminal Barack Obama. I don't know about you but that tells me something about not just the base, but the vast majority of democratic party supporters. I'd imagine about 80% of democratic party supporters also support the Russia hysteria.

#8 I was initially perplexed on how some visible progressive voices did not see through the russiagate BS. Michael Moore at one point called Trump a Russian traitor. I think they saw how ruinous it would be for their brand/voice if they adopted skepticism or were just neutral on it. When clips of Jimmy Dore/TYT Aggressive Progressive clips were posted to youtube, the haters really came out.

My conclusion is that the much ofthe base of the democratic party was fully invested in Russiagate, and it is that audience that sustains many public progressive voices. Michael Moore would never appear again on Bill Mahrer's show if he became a Russiagate skeptic.

#8.2 support Obama, still. He had an 80% approval rating his entire 8 years from democrats. That is Wall street war criminal Barack Obama. I don't know about you but that tells me something about not just the base, but the vast majority of democratic party supporters. I'd imagine about 80% of democratic party supporters also support the Russia hysteria.

@Big Al
of a recent poll to that effect? I am not disputing that it may be true. I would just like to see a link. Thanks.

#8.2 support Obama, still. He had an 80% approval rating his entire 8 years from democrats. That is Wall street war criminal Barack Obama. I don't know about you but that tells me something about not just the base, but the vast majority of democratic party supporters. I'd imagine about 80% of democratic party supporters also support the Russia hysteria.

up

3 users have voted.

—

"I don't want to run the empire, I want to bring it down!" ~Dr. Cornel West

"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." John F Kennedy

@gulfgal98
one recently that indicated he's just as popular among democrats now, if not more so, than he was during his reign of terror. Makes sense, people forget over time and the past looks good compared to the present. It's a well known fact that approval ratings go with the party affiliations, same thing now with Trump among republicans.

@detroitmechworks
i don't give a flying fuck about the political maneuvering and theater, i care only about policy. yes, i'm uncomfortable with some of Sanders' foreign policy murmurings; nonetheless, i like to imagine living in a country where his domestic policies find their way into practice, and regardless of whether he's a dirty ratfink supporter of the american imperialist enterprise blah blah fucking blah blah, i think a Sanders administration would move towards a dramatic spend-down on the military budget (including a lot of our pointless -- and worse -- overseas bases).

if i'm wrong, i'm wrong, but that's my problem, not anybody else's.

I mean, He's right on the BIG issues, so therefore this little thing is nothing... After all, this is just helping the people realize that he's a bad president and needs to be removed.

Just because you can't see the evidence doesn't mean it isn't there. We need to keep digging. Maybe get a different artist...
/snark

up

3 users have voted.

—

The earth is a multibillion-year-old sphere.
The Nazis killed millions of Jews.
On 9/11/01 a Boeing 757 (AA77) flew into the Pentagon.
AGCC is happening.
If you cannot accept these facts, I cannot fake an interest in any of your opinions.

However, if Bernie, Tulsi, or Warren are nominated, fat chance, I will vote for them. If not, it will be Green unless I am so pissed off that the Dems stole another one, I vote Trump out of spite. If voting Green improves Trump's odds of winning, then why not help to guarantee the Dem candidate's loss by directly voting for Trump? Gridlock would be perfect. Vote for the Dems in the House and Senate, and vote Trump as President. Then for at least two years, they'll just sit up there and fight and leave us alone.

Of the three candidates I named, each promises to bring a much needed set of policies to the country. If their promises are a big lie, probably are, can't be any worse than Trump unless the Dems control all three branches. If they aren't a big lie, a part of the country's needs will at least be given a lick and a promise.

Looks like I never will vote.
Well and truly fucked, we are.
There's no hope.
Front row seat to the end of the world.
Wish I was a Russian.
Fuck.

@dkmich
We'll see what happens between now and then. I think out of the three you mentioned, Bernie has the best chance.

Other than the explanation that gulfgal98 gave, the only other explanation I can think of for him continuing this bullshit is that he actually believes it. Honestly, I don't know which is worse. Or maybe he's trying to prove that he himself didn't collude with Russia.

I notice that he did not mention Russia though. Maybe it wasn't Russia he was talking about?

Also, the timestamps on the tweets. Less than an hour after Bernie made his tweet, WP made the tweet about "Russian interference sought to boost Bernie Sanders". It's like he's trying to play their game but he doesn't realize they're playing dodge ball and he's standing in the middle.

However, if Bernie, Tulsi, or Warren are nominated, fat chance, I will vote for them. If not, it will be Green unless I am so pissed off that the Dems stole another one, I vote Trump out of spite. If voting Green improves Trump's odds of winning, then why not help to guarantee the Dem candidate's loss by directly voting for Trump? Gridlock would be perfect. Vote for the Dems in the House and Senate, and vote Trump as President. Then for at least two years, they'll just sit up there and fight and leave us alone.

Of the three candidates I named, each promises to bring a much needed set of policies to the country. If their promises are a big lie, probably are, can't be any worse than Trump unless the Dems control all three branches. If they aren't a big lie, a part of the country's needs will at least be given a lick and a promise.

@dkmich
I have been openly supporting Tulsi and intend to vote for her in the primary. If Bernie gets the nomination, I will most likely vote for him. If for some reason, Bernie does not get the nom or he does something really stupid like pick a corporatist as his VP, I will definitely vote Green.

I am going to say this. The Democratic party in its current state needs to die. It is a corrupt organization run by some of the most vicious and hard hearted people around.

However, if Bernie, Tulsi, or Warren are nominated, fat chance, I will vote for them. If not, it will be Green unless I am so pissed off that the Dems stole another one, I vote Trump out of spite. If voting Green improves Trump's odds of winning, then why not help to guarantee the Dem candidate's loss by directly voting for Trump? Gridlock would be perfect. Vote for the Dems in the House and Senate, and vote Trump as President. Then for at least two years, they'll just sit up there and fight and leave us alone.

Of the three candidates I named, each promises to bring a much needed set of policies to the country. If their promises are a big lie, probably are, can't be any worse than Trump unless the Dems control all three branches. If they aren't a big lie, a part of the country's needs will at least be given a lick and a promise.

up

13 users have voted.

—

"I don't want to run the empire, I want to bring it down!" ~Dr. Cornel West

"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." John F Kennedy

vying for the Green Presidential spot? takes a while for the steering committee to decide, as i understand it. but in my diary on the subject, i'd had a very hard time understanding the process/protocols.

#11.1 I have been openly supporting Tulsi and intend to vote for her in the primary. If Bernie gets the nomination, I will most likely vote for him. If for some reason, Bernie does not get the nom or he does something really stupid like pick a corporatist as his VP, I will definitely vote Green.

I am going to say this. The Democratic party in its current state needs to die. It is a corrupt organization run by some of the most vicious and hard hearted people around.

who will try to make it into the Green primaries. 4 besides howie hawkins, and actual socialists from what i can discover. i'd had to laugh that they've listed jesse ventura as 'considering'. ; ) the whole nominating process is on wikipedia somewhere, but it was very confusing to me.

i do remember though that bruce dixon had said in the past that the steering committee met but once a year (wot?), and that the greens had been taken over by white people. but then he's touting howie hawkins (my choice) and he's...white.(j/k) ; )

#11.1 I have been openly supporting Tulsi and intend to vote for her in the primary. If Bernie gets the nomination, I will most likely vote for him. If for some reason, Bernie does not get the nom or he does something really stupid like pick a corporatist as his VP, I will definitely vote Green.

I am going to say this. The Democratic party in its current state needs to die. It is a corrupt organization run by some of the most vicious and hard hearted people around.

"The question is when did Bernie and the doddering Sen. Leahy, who apparently was the prime mover and shaker to bring the F35 to Vermont, discover that the F35 would be nuclear capable? Greco says that public records shows that after Vermont was initially explored and dismissed by the Air Force as being an unsuitable location with South Carolina being the preferred location, Leahy personally intervened to bring the F35 to Vermont."

Sanders, Gabbard, Warren, all of the democratic party is completely on board with US imperialism and the military industrial complex. Russia has to be the enemy and it was perfect to also use Russia to get to Trump. Pretty simple.

A couple years ago Glen Ford of the BAR wrote, "Why Bernie Sanders is an Imperialist Pig". I've seen plenty of other commentary and evidence from years prior for Sanders' support of imperialism, the MIC, and most of the false narratives used to justify each and the resultant wars, exactly like this Russia and democracy thing. So it's not like this is new.

Truthfully though from what I've seen, it doesn't matter much to his supporters. To them, he's still better than the rest therefore he is.

I do find Sanders to be very hypocritical by focusing on foreign interference of our elections when our national election system is clearly a farce of "our own" making.

care about imperialism as a litmus test, i was not surprised whe i'd dug up the senate version of the house's defense of nato bill: 'Senate votes to support NATO ahead of Trump' summit, Avery Anapol - 07/10/18, the hill

"Lawmakers on Tuesday overwhelmingly voted in favor of a motion supporting NATO, as President Trump continues to criticize the alliance ahead of his summit in Europe.

The nonbinding motion, which came as the Senate voted to reconcile its version of the annual defense policy bill with that of the House, expresses the Senate’s support for NATO and calls on negotiators to reaffirm the U.S. commitment to it.

The 97-2 vote in the Senate comes as Trump heads to Brussels. He will also travel to the United Kingdom and meet one-on-one with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Helsinki during his trip.

Democratic Sen. Jack Reed (R.I.) proposed the measure, calling the U.S. support for NATO "ironclad."

Trump has long been critical of NATO members for failing to meet their defense spending commitments, and has ramped up the criticism in the days ahead of the summit."

is there any more imperialist repurposed relic of the cold war against russia than Nato (and it's evil spawn: Africom)? and of course the true reason for the house version was that the NYT had published a whole: 'anonymous Trump generals are saying he rally does want out of nato... (which he'd actually campaigned on, kinda like 'out of nafta'.

but i agree, big al, supporters of candidates can minimize anything they choose to disregard.

"The question is when did Bernie and the doddering Sen. Leahy, who apparently was the prime mover and shaker to bring the F35 to Vermont, discover that the F35 would be nuclear capable? Greco says that public records shows that after Vermont was initially explored and dismissed by the Air Force as being an unsuitable location with South Carolina being the preferred location, Leahy personally intervened to bring the F35 to Vermont."

Sanders, Gabbard, Warren, all of the democratic party is completely on board with US imperialism and the military industrial complex. Russia has to be the enemy and it was perfect to also use Russia to get to Trump. Pretty simple.

A couple years ago Glen Ford of the BAR wrote, "Why Bernie Sanders is an Imperialist Pig". I've seen plenty of other commentary and evidence from years prior for Sanders' support of imperialism, the MIC, and most of the false narratives used to justify each and the resultant wars, exactly like this Russia and democracy thing. So it's not like this is new.

Truthfully though from what I've seen, it doesn't matter much to his supporters. To them, he's still better than the rest therefore he is.

I do find Sanders to be very hypocritical by focusing on foreign interference of our elections when our national election system is clearly a farce of "our own" making.

@wendy davis@wendy davis
it's either the lesser evil thing or they honestly believe their candidate can deliver on at least some promises. Old as the hills. On both sides like with Trump draining the swamp but actually filling it full with cretins and his base still supports his ass. Like with Sanders and Gabbard, you can find all sorts of indications they support US imperialism via votes and statements, but it won't matter to most of their supporters because they're still considered better than the alternative and they offer promises.
I wrote an article a couple years ago when Sanders was previously running with the question, would you kill children for medicare for all? In other words, if a politician and political party supports imperialism, which entails the deaths of many children, but also supports medicare for all, would you vote for that person and political party so you could get (you won't anyway) medicare for all even though it would also mean the deaths of more children?

care about imperialism as a litmus test, i was not surprised whe i'd dug up the senate version of the house's defense of nato bill: 'Senate votes to support NATO ahead of Trump' summit, Avery Anapol - 07/10/18, the hill

"Lawmakers on Tuesday overwhelmingly voted in favor of a motion supporting NATO, as President Trump continues to criticize the alliance ahead of his summit in Europe.

The nonbinding motion, which came as the Senate voted to reconcile its version of the annual defense policy bill with that of the House, expresses the Senate’s support for NATO and calls on negotiators to reaffirm the U.S. commitment to it.

The 97-2 vote in the Senate comes as Trump heads to Brussels. He will also travel to the United Kingdom and meet one-on-one with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Helsinki during his trip.

Democratic Sen. Jack Reed (R.I.) proposed the measure, calling the U.S. support for NATO "ironclad."

Trump has long been critical of NATO members for failing to meet their defense spending commitments, and has ramped up the criticism in the days ahead of the summit."

is there any more imperialist repurposed relic of the cold war against russia than Nato (and it's evil spawn: Africom)? and of course the true reason for the house version was that the NYT had published a whole: 'anonymous Trump generals are saying he rally does want out of nato... (which he'd actually campaigned on, kinda like 'out of nafta'.

but i agree, big al, supporters of candidates can minimize anything they choose to disregard.

the devil's choice you'd offered? i'd ask how the votes went, but i suspect i know already. i can't say i read the comment stream here carefully, but it seems more care for bernie's domestic policy, and hope that he'll at least cut the military budget and so on.

i'll remind you, amigo, that not everyone feels as strongly about amerikan Imperialalism as you and i do. oooof, time for me to shut down for the night; i've spent waaaay to many hours reading about the military skirmishes afoot between pakistan and india. (i'd seen a headline at RT in which modi was bragging to imran khan that india now has 'the mother of all nuclear bombs' (remind you of anyone?) g' night.

#12.1#12.1 it's either the lesser evil thing or they honestly believe their candidate can deliver on at least some promises. Old as the hills. On both sides like with Trump draining the swamp but actually filling it full with cretins and his base still supports his ass. Like with Sanders and Gabbard, you can find all sorts of indications they support US imperialism via votes and statements, but it won't matter to most of their supporters because they're still considered better than the alternative and they offer promises.
I wrote an article a couple years ago when Sanders was previously running with the question, would you kill children for medicare for all? In other words, if a politician and political party supports imperialism, which entails the deaths of many children, but also supports medicare for all, would you vote for that person and political party so you could get (you won't anyway) medicare for all even though it would also mean the deaths of more children?

his tells me that Bernie will play along with lying to the American people for whatever reasons the democrats have decided to hitch their wagon to this false scandal.

If I'm not mistaken, you've mentioned both reasons for this "Big Lie" (at least, to my mind), previously.

They are:

1) It (the "Big Lie") gives FSC 'cover' for her loss--so that she can declare a third run without becoming a laughingstock, or, the object of mockery and ridicule. "Because the election was stolen from her, in 2016," don cha know.

and,

2) The BL serves as an excuse for Dems to push shutting down/censoring social media platforms.

Don't have time (right now), but, I've posted on several occasions the CNBC transcript of WJC and 'the Money Honey' (Maria Bartiromo, before she moved to Fox) talking about the need for a new federal department, or, as WJC put it--a Ministry Of Truth.

Yikes!

Suppose it's possible that there's a third one--to diminish, or take the shine off Bernie's rise/influence in the Dem Party, as a result of his highly successful/competitive run in 2016.

Mollie

I think dogs are the most amazing creatures; they give unconditional love. For me they are the role model for being alive.~~Gilda Radner, Comedienne